03101980 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I 70 regular meeting march 10, 1980 page three AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION 29-110.1 ENTITLED "TO BE PLACED AND MAINTAINED AT OR NEAR SPECIFIC STREET INTERSECTIONS" OF ARTICLE V, ENTITLED "TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES" OF CHAPTER 29, ENTITLED "TRAFFIC" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS! BY CHANGING THE TITLE OF SAID SECTION; BY ADDING SIX LOCATIONS AND DELETING TWO LOCATIONS ~T WHICH POLICE ARE UATHORIZED TO PLACE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. James moved to accept the Ordinance on first reading. Mr. Sutton seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Cavazos made a motion to amend this Ordinance to an emergency. Mr. Breihan seconded the motion. On roll call, the following vote was recorded on the motion to amend: AYE: Breihan, Cavazos, James, Sutton, Tenorio NAY: Hansen The motion to adopt the Ordinance, as amended, was unanimously approved. The Mayor introduced for consideration an Ordinance on first reading having the following caption: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, DECLARING THE POLICY OF SAID CITY PERTAINING TO ETHICAL CONDUCT OF CITY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES; DEFINING TERMS; ESTABLISHING STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; SETTING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST IN DECISIONS PENDING BEFORE SAID OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; DESIGNATING PERSON TO WHOM DISCLOSURE SHALL BE MADE: REQUIRING A FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FROM CERTAIN CITY OFFICIALS; DESIGNATING INFORMATION TO BE REPORTED ON SAID STATEMENT; SETTING PROCEDURES FOR RETENTION AND INSPECTION OF STATEMENTS: DESIGNATING PERSON TO PROMULGATE AND PROVIDE FORMS FOR STATEMENTS; ESTABLISHING AN ETHICS REVIEW CO~~ISSION; ESTABLISHING DUTIES OF SAID COMMISSION; SETTING PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The Ordinance was read in its entirety. Dr. Kenneth Long suggested that the word "invalidity" appearing on the eighth line from the bottom of the last page should be "validity". The City Attorney concurred. David McCall presented a report to the Council on behalf of the Ethics Review Commission. Shirley Wickersham asked why other Boards were not included in the financial disclosure section. Dr. Craddock responded that the Council could add any boards or committees it felt should meet the requirements. John Morrisset addressed the Council with his concern about listing the amounts of money made or owed by an individual. He felt that to whom money is owed to should be listed, but not the amount. Mrs. Morrisset added the contention that the financial disclosure requirement imposed would place persons owning businesses in the unfair position of having to release unnecessary information to business competitors. Joe Cox stated that the courts upheld financial disclosure requirements, stating that the public's right to know outweighed the right to privacy. Jake Krauskopf said the financial disclosure statement was a way of showing if a person was a good business person, but he did not want to see good people not willing to serve on Boards because of the financial date requested. Dr. Durrett had a question about the definition of "confidential information" The City Attorney explained the definition. Mr. Breihan said that he felt the Charter and oaths of office sufficiently covered ethical standards imposed on elected and appointed officials. The Mayor said the City Manager should be included, all Civil Service and all Boards appointed by the Council. Mr. James said it was an excellent Ordinance, but that it was the duty of the City Manager to deal with employees. His only question was on the categories. The City Manager said that if a financial